Habeas Corpus, the “great writ” that incarcerated people can use to get out of jail, is used by immigration lawyers working to keep foreign nationals who’ve landed in the United States from being detained or deported.
But Habeas Corpus comes with one drawback. There is no time clock. Judges are not required to make timely decisions or any decision at all. No Habeas Corpus petitions illustrate that point better than Stewart Parnell v. United States and Michael Parnell v United States. Their cases do not involve foreign nationals, but food safety, or lack thereof.
Stewart Parnell, the former president of Peanut Corporation of America, is serving the longest criminal sentence ever in a food safety case — 28 years. His brother, Michael Parnell, is not far behind with a 20-year sentence. Both were convicted by a jury trial 11 years ago, actions associated with a 17-year-old multi-state Salmonella outbreak that sickened more than 700 and resulted in nine deaths.
The charges that brought them down were conspiracy to defraud their customers by shipping salmonella-positive peanut products. They were also sentenced for falsifying microbiological test results. Their tainted peanut butter led to the outbreak.
The six-year-old Parnell Habeas Corpus petitions were finally consolidated and heard in oral arguments on Sept. 26, 2024, before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta.
More than six months later, there has been no ruling
That panel, consisting of Chief Judge William H. Pryor Jr., Judge Robert J. Luck, and Senior Judge Edward Earl Carnes, has remained silent about what they heard during those oral arguments.
Many Habeas Corpus petitions are often filed pro se, meaning on one’s behalf without the benefit of an attorney, and often by “jailhouse lawyers.” That’s not the case for the Parnell petitions.
